Shop prices

The Bank of England will doubtless want to put out a gloomy forecast for inflation for next year based on a lower pound.

They need to remember that October showed a further 1.7% fall in shop prices, including a 1.2% fall in food prices. This is from the BRC Index. This 1.7% decline figure is identical to the declines of 1.7% recorded in April and May this year before the vote.

It is true that imports will get a bit dearer from here, but important to remember we start from negative inflation on shop prices.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

119 Comments

  1. Antisthenes
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    The experts the BoE amongst them tell us the deflation is bad inflation is good. It is not but that is another matter. Inflation they tell us is currently too low but as soon as inflation threatens to rise and that for probably no longer than a short period they make all sort of apocalyptic claims. I believe that tells us that experts are basically hypocritical idiots more interested in self interest than ours. That we should treat any advice they give with extreme caution and first seek the realreasons behind them giving it.

    • Qubus
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

      One has to remember that economics is a pseudo-science. Who was it who said, “put 50 economists together in a room and they will come up with 51 different predictions” … all wrong I would suggest.

      I seem to remember that, some years ago, there were 50 economists signed a letter to, I think, the Daily Telegraph telling us what a catastrophe it would be if we didn’t join the euro. I regret to say that Mervyn King was one of them, one of the few economists for whom I have any regard.

      • Antisthenes
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:40 am | Permalink

        Not all economists are the calibre of Danny Blanchflower, Pikerty, Keynes, Krugman and the like. In fact Danny Blanchflower who has never made an economic prediction that was not the opposite of the truth, like all the other left wing economists, endorses Carney as the right person to be the governor of BoE. Never a surer reason for Carney to leave the job immediately.

        You are right put 50 economists in a room and the result is as you suggest but that is true of any similar situation in any walk of life. Not been down the pub lately? The answer of course is to seek out those who are the most honest, logical, rational and whose opinions you empathise with the most. When it comes to economists I always go to those who follow the Austrian economic school of thought. For politics I look for politicians who are right wing and a tendency towards libertarianism(sometimes I have to compromise on the latter). I would encourage everyone else to do the same because it is my opinion if they did the world would end up being what we are striving for.

  2. a-tracy
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    If the large supermarkets start big price increases and their sales dip can we report at the same time how the discount food stores and frozen food stores are doing? From what I’m hearing people are trying out new food buying habits, after hearing one large store was putting up its prices my Mother switched after about 20 years of loyal purchasing.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

      A – Tracy. I switched from the large well known supermarkets a while ago now before Brexit was even on the cards and I can safely say that I have saved a fortune. If some of the smaller chains of supermarkets (you all know who I mean) can keep their prices down then the bigger chains need to watch out. How is it possible for the price of T bags to rise by 50% when inflation has not gone up that much? I think a few producers will find this a chance to make money out of the consumers. With Brexit terms taking so long is it hardly surprising that there is negativity in the markets? Is it the establishments goal to make things so bad that we all retract our vote to leave because of all the doom and gloom being made worse by indecision? I am still not convinced we will leave especially with the guy from Scotland this morning saying our decision could be overturned anytime during the negotiations.

    • Jerry
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      @a-tracy; “can we report at the same time how the discount food stores and frozen food stores are doing?”

      By all means compare supermarkets but make sure to compare like with like, quality and perhaps quantity, for example that cheaper vacuum packed gammon ham might appear to be a bargain, both pack headline the same weight but one ham has been pumped full of brine and the other not. That cheaper confectionery bar or what ever looks the same size, indeed the pack is the same physical size as the more expensive product in that other supermarket but the content is smaller -as noted on the weight that some will fail to notice.

      Caveat emptor…

      • a-tracy
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:01 am | Permalink

        Caveat emptor…the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made…

        My Mum said the meat from Aldi was from UK sources and tasted much nicer than what she’d been buying actually Jerry and she is really picky, she said there was less water running off too and that they both preferred it.

        It’s better that confectionery bars are smaller surely! She also said that she has compared like for like branded products and has found Wilkos better value for any bargain hunters out there.

        • Jerry
          Posted November 5, 2016 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

          a-tracy; “It’s better that confectionery bars are smaller surely!”

          Not if you’re paying the same as the bigger (original) sized bar, that is in effect a price hike, sure make the bar smaller but cut the price too…

          I was merely pointing out that price comparison, and then slagging off a supermarket or brand, is meaningless unless you do compare like with like. If your mum likes the meat in Aldi then good for her, not that it proves anything!

          • a-tracy
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

            I didn’t “slag off” any supermarket Jerry, I was very careful not to!

            You seem very touchy.

            A kilo of sugar of the same brand was cheaper in a value store than a major supermarket, people I know are checking more carefully now and are changing their purchasing habits, they may be anecdotal but if it’s good enough to use anecdotal quotes for Jeremy Corbyn then why doesn’t it prove my argument Jerry?

          • Jerry
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 11:30 am | Permalink

            @a-tracy; You do realise that there are various qualities of sugar, not just types of raw and refined sugar, so once again how do you know if you are comparing like with like – are you a food chemist, have you scientifically analysed both products or are you just going on the fact that both are the same colour and have what looks like the same gain structure/texture?

            Oh and yes, the right-wing do use anecdotal quotes and ‘facts’ when attempting to vilify Mr Corbyn, in the same way as you appear to be trying to use anecdotal facts to vilify the big name supermarkets and stores.

            Trial by (simplistic) sound-bite…

          • a-tracy
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

            Do you know what you’re buying Jerry are you a chemist? I’m looking at my 50p 1kg bag of granulated sugar from Tate and Lyle by appointment to Her Majesty the Queen, I’m extremely satisfied with the price and the quality are you suggesting the packing is fake from my local discount store?

            I wasn’t vilifying anybody I don’t know why things are cheaper but my family and their friends and now I am passing on tips for making shopping savings to my fellow bloggers. Us simple folk know when we’re hearing a line.

    • Edward2
      Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:34 am | Permalink

      Correct a-Tracey
      The new better value supermarket chains have certainly added some long overdue competition into the market.
      Their offerings are of good quality, I find, and can save significant sums on the weekly food shop.
      It would be interesting to know how much weighting the Govt statisticians give to these companies when they develop their basket of goods for official inflation figures.

      • a-tracy
        Posted November 5, 2016 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

        They should be giving more attention to them, they’re the new shops with queues.

  3. Peter Martin
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:11 am | Permalink

    Measuring inflation isn’t as easy as it might seem at first glance. Suppose, in the UK economy, that prices were constant apart from those brought about the change in the currency level.

    When the currency fell we’d see the price of imported goods rise in £ an pence terms . When the currency rose we’d see the price of imported goods fall.

    So would that mean we’d have inflation when the pound fell and deflation when it rose?

    I don’t think it would. We need to take all that into account when we are measuring inflation and I’m not sure that we are.

    • Qubus
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

      But of course it would. Inflation is when the price of goods in the shops rises, irrespective of the origin of that rise; and of course we have now been hoodwinked into thinking in terms of CPI and not RPI.

      Furthermore, people don’t seem to recognise that every family has a slightly different inflation/deflation index depending upon their purchasing habits and lifestyle.

  4. a-tracy
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:16 am | Permalink

    As for Next reporting a slowdown yesterday, they should look at their miserable stock lines! I didn’t buy one item in store last year after previously being a fairly regular customer for workwear. I didn’t even buy their sales lines as they were so dire. M&S are finally getting their game together. I havent purchased clothes in there either for over a year but taking on the Alexa Chung line is inspired and they need to realise 50 is the new 40 and people don’t want to wear dull, old fashioned clothes their parent’s generation put up with. Retailers need to ensure they know the real reasons their sales are down, their new Sparks card is rubbish too.

    • Jerry
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

      @a-tracy; “Retailers need to ensure they know the real reasons their sales are down”

      But if they were selling the same fashon trend before June 23rd as they are currently but have seen a slowdown since your suggestion that the reason is due to “miserable stock lines” hardly stacked up.

      • a-tracy
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

        They change the fashions each season Jerry, 3 to 4 times per year, do you shop in Next? My daughter no longer shops there, my sons have moved on. I’m not bothered whether you believe me or not.

        • Jerry
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 7:37 am | Permalink

          a-tracy; Whilst I’m not bothered whether you believe me or not either, your comment says nothing about retail trends, just your own personal/family tastes in fashion. Your rant about supermarkets elsewhere just shows that you (and others…) do not have a first clue as to how retailing in the UK works.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:37 am | Permalink

            As usual Jerry you expose your lack of knowledge of the trade in your rush to post.
            One company posting poor sales is not a market trend.
            And the company mentioned is one which is struggling in a very competitive market with a lacklustre offering as a-Tracey correctly states.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 4, 2016 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

            @Edwazrd2; “One company posting poor sales is not a market trend.”

            I never said it was, my comment was about fashion trends, not sales as I even noted in the comment you replied to, do please do try and read what I actually say. As usual Eddie you expose a complete lack of understanding when it comes to context, in your rush to post.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 12:09 am | Permalink

            I realise that Jerry
            I was responding to the broader point.

            Which is how those who are Remain supporters jump to use the posting of negative sales figures by one company in one sector of the economy as being representative of the trend of the whole economy.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; My comment had nothing what so ever to do with Brexit, just retail facts of life, as you would have known if you knew anything about the retail industry or their supply side.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:39 am | Permalink

            You need to read your first post to a-Tracey again Jerry
            You were refusing to accept that the company who posted poor results could not have been caused by other than Brexit.
            All bad news is caused by Brexit is your motto.
            Both a-Tracey and improving retail sales figures prove you wrong.
            And no amount of false claims about your superior knowledge on yet another area of expertise will alter these facts.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; You need to start reading the context and not just the words (and even then you read extra words into what people say)! My point was that we can not proportion blame for a sales-downturn either way, that unless you have the retail data you can not proportion blame, yes it could be trends, it might also be Brexit, it could even have been the weather.

            Also in the comment you reference I made mention of “Brexit”, just the date of June 23rd, I could have said Q1. or Q2. and my comment would have still been true.

  5. David Lister
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    … and to add some balance, Apple, Dell, HP, Microsoft have all announced price increases of up to 20%, food products from Unilever and Typhoo Tea already indicating price increases of 12.5%. Petrol is now £1,25/litre.

  6. Denis Cooper
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    Never mind about shop prices, now Theresa May needs to start drawing up a list of several hundred new life peers who will vote down the bad losers in the Lords when they try to stop us leaving the EU. That’s assuming they can still be created by Royal Prerogative. And also assuming that she actually intends that we shall leave the EU.

    Next time I get an official leaflet from the government with a crystal clear promise I will just rip it up and throw it in the bin as worthless trash.

    • Chris
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

      I feel as utterly disgusted as you sound, Denis.

    • Jerry
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

      Denis Cooper; How many times, the Lords can not block, they can only delay (and not for long is the government wish to force their so called “Great Repeal Bill” or what ever through, what is more as the Brexit referendum (& result) was a manifesto commitment the government could ultimately use the Parliament act.

      What some right-wing europhobes do not like is that they might not be allowed to go on a political land-grab, for which they have no mandate. No one knows why 17 odd million people voted for Brexit other than they did and thus what they expect from Brexit apart from leaving the European Union, their wishes could be anything from Brexit but joining the EFTA to Brexit without even WTO membership. After all there was 28 or so Brexit groups campaigning for a Leave result but no two campaigned on the same Brexit manifesto…

      Anyone who campaigned for Brexit claiming that the UK needed to ‘take back’ her sovereignty and parliamentary democracy from the autocratic EU but now dislikes the UK parliament having there say, having a vote, even more having further referenda, is being the utmost hypocrite.

      • Edward2
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:45 am | Permalink

        And what exactly will the vote be about Jerry?
        Do all the various left leaning Europhile groups have one voice?
        Perhaps you can tell us, exactly.what motion in Parliament all on remains side would all agree on.

        Or will one or two from your side want court rulings on the wording or thevalidity of the vote in Parliament as well?

        • Jerry
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

          @Edward2; “Perhaps you can tell us, exactly.what motion in Parliament all on remains side would all agree on.”

          How about something along the lines of; “This house has considered the result of the referendum, we note the desire by a majority to leave the European Union, we instruct the Prime Minister to activate Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to begin the process of our exit from the European Union.”

          But that is not your problem is it, what people like you are scared stiff about is parliament correctly demanding a say or another referendum on the terms of exit (the “How” question) for which there is no mandate as the public have not been asked how we should leave. Ditching one autocracy for another is not what Brexit was about, Vote Leave (and other Brexit groups) said so, when they demanded that UK parliamentary sovereignty be returned back from the EU.

          If politicos want to try and ramrod their vision of the future, be it Brexit or something else (such as restoring pro-union laws or renationalisations) through by extra-parliamentary methods because a parliamentary majority is doubtful, such as the misuse of the Royal Prerogative, then yes there should be as many High Court cased as needed to protect our constitution and parliament – this is not just a Brexit issue but goes to the heart of our parliamentary sovereignty, today, tomorrow and in the years to come. Be very careful of setting precedents that you later regret upon a change in controlling political ideology…

          • Edward2
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 12:13 am | Permalink

            Gosh what a long post Jerry

            First I’m not scared stiff.

            Parliament will make its mind up
            Or an election will happen and the decision will pass back to the people.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; “Gosh what a long post Jerry”

            Perhaps but then serious issues are not just populist sound-bites…

            “Parliament will make its mind up”

            Not if it is deigned any chance of doing so and that means having a meaningful vote at the end of a any debate, otherwise the PM might as well ask the Mother Union or WI to debate Brexit.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:43 am | Permalink

            Parliament will make its mind up one way or another.
            If the courts and the Lords frustrate the process then ultimately there will be an election.

            Why hasn’t Labour and Lib Dems called for such a debate?
            Perhaps you ought to ask them.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; “If the courts and the Lords frustrate the process then ultimately there will be an election.”

            Well perhaps, if Mrs May can not keep her own side on-side, on the other hand she and Brexiteers could simply seek a consensus, far less risky that than copping a strop, claiming a loss of confidence and then perhaps having UKIP split the Tory majority and thus allow a Labour or Labour lead coalition into government at the resultant general election – or did you just mean another Tory leadership election?!…

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:07 am | Permalink

        How many times do I have to point out that delay is what the Remoaners in the Lords want, in the hope that the longer the delay the more likely that something will turn up to keep us in the EU?

        I’ve already given this link several times, Jerry, you should read it:

        http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/opinions/a-rebellion-in-the-lords-brexit-article-50-referendum

        “A rebellion in the Lords”

        “… The Lords would be resoundingly “not content” and could remain a blockage to the legislation for up to one year.

        Much might change in that time. The EU might even concede that the UK was not the only country which needed to see some curbs on free movement and make changes. Then their lordships might argue that there was a good reason to call that second referendum and hope for a very different result.”

        • Jerry
          Posted November 5, 2016 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

          @Denis Cooper; Thank you for your opinion, and that is all you have posted, not one word of fact based argument.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:02 am | Permalink

            So it is not a fact that in August Baroness Wheatcroft had that article in Prospect Magazine, just my opinion.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:44 am | Permalink

            Seems very factual to me.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

            @Denis Cooper (and @Edward2); How many more times, the Lords can not stop legislation, nor is the government obliged to accept any amendments asked for by the Lords – any damager is not in the Lords but the HoC, except that Mrs May has a working majority – or should have (so scrub that, the danger is not in the HoC either, but in the Tory party…).

            Both Brexit and Remain politicos are blowing hot air about in abundance and much is not fact, just opinionated partisan comment aimed to appeal to their respective supporters.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 6:31 pm | Permalink

      Denis, agreed.

      Yes the High Court decision is a disgrace, and the Govt has not been too different. The exPM had seemed to indicate he would invoke A50 immmediately after the referendum, but then ran away. Due to no plan this has now been dragged out allowing legal actions to be taken.

      There is clearly little democracy in the U.K. and non-representative institutions remain in charge. Shocking.

      • Jerry
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:27 am | Permalink

        @Caterpillar; Oh right, so the courts upholding constitutional law is a “disgrace”, that sort of brown bashing of the courts today, given a different government in the future, could come back to haunt – do you really want the radical left being able to ramrod say renationalisation and pro-union laws through without parliamentary oversight, simply because a manifesto or referendum asked a very open single question about such issues?

        Be very careful of making a rod for yore own back!

      • Mitchel
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:20 am | Permalink

        “There is clearly little democracy in the UK”

        Well that’s been obvious for the best part of two decades and Mandelson in his pomp even told us so.Not just the EU,but Human Rights Judges,the UN,politicised charities and NGOs,quangos,etc all have greater influence on the government than the people-that influence/power quietly bestowed upon them by Blair here and Clinton in the US in pursuance of the globalised liberal agenda.

        That is also the main reason in my view why they are trying to drive us to war with Russia-it’s not really about Ukraine or Syria-Russia has launched a cultural counteroffensive against this liberal(which isn’t actually liberal)tendency through the UN and other platforms in support of traditional family values and the nation state – with some success.

  7. Lifelogic
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Of course the pound would be rather stronger if Carney, the usual suspects and the government stopped devaluing it, talking it down and we had slightly higher interest rates. We could also move to cheap reliable non green crap energy which would save far more than any increases due to the lower pound.

    Stopping HS2, Hinkley and setting a sound smaller state, having a bonfire of red tape and a far lower taxes fiscal direction would help too. Alas we do not have real Tories in charge.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

      Hear, hear to that Lifelogic.

  8. Denis Cooper
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    Summary of judgment here:

    https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summary-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf

    Full judgment here:

    https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judgment-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf

    How many times over three years did I point out the absence from successive referendum Bills of any provision for what would ensue from a vote to leave? If I could see that, why could ministers and MPs and peers also not see it?

    • Chris
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

      It is being suggested that that is how the politicians wanted it i.e. to enable a reversal of the result? Having seen the depths to which the europhiles stoop, this would not surprise me. Honest Eurosceptic MPs are going to be involved in the fight of their lives to uphold democracy.

      • Bob
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

        As I have said consistently, if you want UK independence you have to vote for the only Party whose raison d’être is UK independence. I cannot put it any clearer than that.

        • Jerry
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:39 am | Permalink

          @Bob; Except that UKIP was seen as a very good reason to vote Remain, indeed had UKIP not been so active during the referendum many more people would have voted to leave.

          No one wants a UKIP, the only reason they hung on to their current single MP was because he is a very respected local MP, people voted for the man not his (adopted) party.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 4, 2016 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

            “No one wants a UKIP”
            Apart from 4.2 million voters.

          • Bob
            Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

            @Jerry

            ” indeed had UKIP not been so active during the referendum many more people would have voted to leave.”

            Without ukip, there would have been no referendum.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

            @Bob: “Without ukip, there would have been no referendum.”

            That is hyperbolic nonsense on stilts and you know full well it is Bob! UKIP have NEVER been in any position to demand a referendum, never mind obtain one.

            But if I’m wrong to tell us what did UKIP did with their two MPs vote -after the referendum Bill had already been passed by the HoC’s- that 305 Conservative (and many of the 57 LD) MPs did not do when the said Bill went through its parliamentary stages…

            The only thing that UKIP has achieved is bad feeling in the EP towards the UK, that will now most likely play out in the pending A50 negotiations.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; “Apart from 4.2 million voters.

            Oh right, so you want PR then [1], no skin off my nose but you might have to kiss Brexit bye-bye as the europhile, left of centre, coalitions govern the UK from now on…

            [1] that is the only way UKIP could obtain any meaningful representation for the number of votes cast in their direction but so would all the other ‘also ran’ parties

          • Edward2
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:46 am | Permalink

            Another poor strawman Jerry.

            You said
            No one wants a UKIP

            I said well apart from 4.2 million voters

    • rose
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

      “If I could see that, why could ministers and MPs and peers also not see it?”

      Because they thought they would win. There were just a few of us swivel-eyed loons, nutcases, fruitcakes, and closet racists to be flushed out.

      • rose
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

        This is an example, too, of how third rate the life peers are. It is their job to scrutinise bills and think of everything the Commons haven’t got time or aren’t clever enough for. The hereditaries would surely have got this right.

        • Mitchel
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:24 am | Permalink

          Rose,I agree with you about the hereditaries for all their faults they did represent the land and continuity of these islands,rather than the hirelings we have now.

  9. Lifelogic
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    So the courts rule against the government on Brexit. Will the government appeal. Are we heading for an early election perhaps?

    Will we ever get out of this appalling, malignant EU? With the powerful forces of the legal profession, most MPs, academia, the state sector, the BBC, the and the luvvies nearly all for remain?

    • Chris
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

      There are parallels with the huge fight that is going on in the US election between the globalists/big corporate concerns/wealthy political elite (who advance the open door policy in order to destroy national identities and allegiances and to create great wealth for a political unaccountable elite) and the “populists” who want to protect the sovereignty of the nation state and its people and who promote democracy as opposed to government by a technocrat taking orders from a political elite. The material that is coming through on the internet and which is now being reported by the mainstream media in the US about the (conduct ed) revealed by the Weiner laptop and many other devices is beyond belief. It appears that many of the people “on the ground” in the FBI, plus key individuals in the NYPD are so appalled/sickened by what has apparently been revealed in connection with Clinton, the Foundation, and the Lolita Express that Jack Comey had to take action. He had no choice.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

      ‘With the powerful forces of the legal profession, most MPs, academia, the state sector, the BBC, the and the luvvies nearly all for remain?’

      – and businesses, economists, The Financial Times, The Economist, the Japanese government, the Chinese, much of corporate America, Sky, ITV, most young people, and so on.

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

        But still less than 50% of people. Sorry, but you lost. More people want to leave than stay. Please get used to this fact.

        • Ed Mahony
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

          I’ve said numerous times that we have to press on with the will of the people – that we have to press on with Brexit (and no second referendums unless something really dramatic happens – in particular, in the economy – and there appears to be a clear majority of people strongly calling for a second referendum).
          However, that doesn’t mean we ignore the concerns of the other 48%, including keeping politicians on their toes so that Brexit works out as best as possible, and to have a contingency plan in place in case things don’t work out (it would be unwise to say there is no risk involved with Brexit – not forgetting of course that risk can be a good thing). That’s just sensible whether you’re in politics, business, or things in general.
          Regards

        • rose
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:46 am | Permalink

          Also, the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Americans would not dream of submitting themselves to Free Movement, annual tribute, and a higher court and legislature. The young people I know voted for independence.

  10. Ed Mahony
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    (but outside the EU i still think we have a moral duty to contribute in some shape or form, to the European development fund or whatever it’s called in order to help stabilise Europe economically and politically so that we don’t have chaos on our doorstep in the future, affecting us in different ways).

    • Know-dice
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

      Ed,

      There is probably no reason why we shouldn’t use International Development funds to help individual European countries that need assistance.

      Just like Norway does.

      But should they [the funds] go through the EU, my answer is NO!!!

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:43 am | Permalink

        Thanks for your reply.
        This is really interesting because i think the concern of many, including myself, is the need for economic and political stability in the EU as a whole (that comes back in some shape or form to affect us in the UK). I haven’t heard one person make the argument you make (not that i don’t believe you, just a fact that people haven’t made this argument). If more people did, then i would be far more positive towards Brexit.
        Regards.

    • Qubus
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

      I would agree, with the proviso that the EU acts generously and sensibly, and not spitefully, in their dealings with us in the forthcoming negotiations.

    • SM
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:31 pm | Permalink

      If the EU is so wonderful, economically and politically, that the UK should remain in it, why does it need stabilising?

    • Bob
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:53 pm | Permalink

      The only way to stem the flow of welfare seekers from around the world to the UK will be to slash welfare handouts.

    • Enrico
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

      Ed do you not think we have a moral duty towards our homeless including the ex forces people who have laid their life on the line for us and also the people who queue at food banks? Forget the rest let’s look after our people first.This is logic not liberal left wing rubbish!!

    • James Matthews
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

      The rest of Europe, individually or collectively, (but probably most effectively in the former case) is entirely capable of looking after itself without either our advice or our money. The only way it is likely to bring chaos to our doorstep is by bringing non- European migrants thereto and the remedy for that is in our hands.

      We made our contribution to European economic and political stability by maintaining hugely expensive Army and Air forces in Germany for decades. One secondary consequence of that was to help to remove from Germany the expense of adequately defending itself and thus the facilitation of the German economic development which eluded us.

      In or out of the EU we are a country with a small population and land area and few natural resources, albeit with, for the time being, a relatively large economy. We don’t have any continuing moral duty to the rest of Europe, or any special obligation to it. It is long past time for us to concentrate exclusively on looking after ourselves.

      • rose
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:49 am | Permalink

        Our wealth per capita is now less than Ireland’s.

        • Mitchel
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

          And adjusting for Purchasing Power Parity,we rank 9th in GDP behind Russia,Brazil and Indonesia(source:World Bank).Further adjusting for population size and we are 25th,just behind Equatorial Guinea.

          All those people feeling hard up should remember that when they are told we are the fifth wealthiest country in the world!

  11. JJE
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    The tech firms are just pricing in dollars and converting to local currency so I think you’ll notice a difference next time you want to replace a laptop or tablet. Look at the recent Apple price increases for an example of what is happening.
    The Apple Store in Causeway Bay in Hong Kong had a lot of UK customers last time I was there – no VAT to pay and I don’t suppose many declare their purchases to UK Customs when they get home.

  12. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    Which of the retail sector will absorb any possible price increases: which will not? Which can and which cannot? These are the questions.
    We may see a streamlining in Retail, the chaff winnowed out. If so, we may all ultimately profit. Any price-war will not make the public victim. But the reverse.
    Though prices in shops may not for one reason or other need to rise at all. Remainders have a surprisingly self-centred approach. The UK exists in a big world and prices are not dictated on purely currency exchange rates.

  13. Anonymous
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    Since the High Court decision this morning it seems unlikely that we are Leaving the EU.

    A Parliament defiant of the majority of the population would be interesting to see and one wonders what position the Queen will take on it.

    • rose
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

      She didn’t take our side each time she signed away our rights in the past.

      Ideally the monarchy is there to resolve constiutional impasses of this kind. But she has mostly given away her prerogatives for fear of provoking left wing revolution.

    • Qubus
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

      The question is, do we elect MPs in order for them to simply reflect the views of the majority of their constituents, or do we elect them to use their independent, considered judgements on behalf of their constituents ?

      • On the bandwagon
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

        Yes but what do we really mean by “elect them?”

      • There is no Law
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

        48% of MPs electorates in many cases were against their elections. 52% obviously were lied to and tricked. There should be a second election of our MPs. It is something the High Court would agree to.

        • Jerry
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:48 am | Permalink

          @TisL; Indeed, and that is why many want proportional representation, but were would that leave Brexit, probably dead in the water.

      • hefner
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

        That’s an essential question. If ever Parliament is given the vote on calling Article 50, and possibly on details of how the UK is to present its case to the EU, it would be good to have each individual MP answering your question.

      • James Matthews
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

        When the whole national electorate has considered a specific question and come to a clear conclusion democracy requires that MPs implement that conclusion, whatever of antiquated constitution (which they ignore when convenient anyway) may say. The need, and therefore the justification, for them to exercise independent judgement has been removed.

        Any other course of action will leave what passes for our democracy completely discredited.

      • Anonymous
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

        Should read:

        Interesting.

        If called to vote on Brexit each MP should vote as their own constituents did in the referendum and not as they think they should.

        Otherwise they will be defying the people and telling them that they know best, rather than representing them.

        I heard somewhere that Brexit (had it been a general election) would have delivered a 400:250 majority for the Leave party.

  14. DaveM
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    Totally OT Mr R – I apologise, and no doubt you’ll talk about this soon.

    I just want to clarify. I’m not an expert on Parliamentary or Constitutional matters, but I was under the impression that an Act of Parliament was legally binding. I’m obviously wrong. So what would happen if I refused to obey the speed limits, committed burglary, pay my taxes, etc?

    This last point is probably more pertinent than I thought when I flippantly wrote it. Ultimately, I pay taxes to an elected government’s coffers whether it is Con, Lab or Monster Raving Loony, because I accept the decision of the majority in GEs because that is way our democracy works. So if I didn’t like the fact that the party I hadn’t voted for won, does that mean I don’t have to pay taxes to it? And more importantly, does it mean that I don’t have to abide by any of the laws which are passed during it’s tenure?

    The Supreme Court has just set a very, very dangerous precedent.

    • Mark B
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 1:26 pm | Permalink

      Our government, and I believe our kind host, were certain of their position. So certain were they that they, once again, failed to plan for the possibility that they might be wrong. This goes beyond mere incompetence, it is malfeasance in public office.

      The question now is, does our new PM have what it takes to get parliament to evoke Art.50 ?

      • Anonymous
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 12:06 am | Permalink

        “The question now is, does our new PM have what it takes to get parliament to evoke Art.50 ?”

        Or was it part of the plan ? To look hard whilst knowing that Brexit would never come to pass.

    • David Lister
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

      This is the point of the ruling. Parliament introduced the relevent legislation, and therefore only Parliament can undo it.

      Using the Royal Prerogative was a flawed decision from the outset.

      The desion returns power to Parliament where it should of course reside.

      • rose
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

        Parliament gave the people the referendum on the understanding that the decision would be binding and that atr 50 would be triggered the next day.

        Each time powers were ceded to the EU this was done by Royal Prerogative, not by Parliament. Each treaty that was signed was signed by the executive. So the executive can revoke them, and this time it has what it did not have before, a clear instruction from the people, in whom sovereignty ultimately lies. There is no legal or logical basis for the judges to say that now powers are coming back, there must suddenly be a Parliamentary vote when there wasn’t for powers being given away.

      • graham1946
        Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

        Funny that pro EU fans have never seen problems with the Royal Prerogative whenever the EU treaties were signed. None went before Parliament for approval, but were signed by governments under the Royal Prerogative.

        We now need to just repeal the European Communities Act and therefore Article 50 won’t be required.

        All this nonsense has come about because Cast Iron Cameron did not keep his word and notify Article 50 the next day after the referendum and has been exacerbated by the ditherer PM Mrs. May, who we can only assume wants the delay in order to slow it all down. This will end up with a fudge like Norway where we don’t really leave at all, we just give up what little influence we had over the EU which would suit Brussels very nicely. A pattern is emerging which some of us warned about some months ago.

      • Anonymous
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 12:04 am | Permalink

        Parliament voted 6:1 to have a binding referendum. We don’t need another vote.

        • Jerry
          Posted November 4, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

          @Anonymous; From one autocracy to another in other words…

          No one is trying to vote down the result of the referendum, just questioning the “When” and “How”, detail that was NOT asked in the referendum.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 10:30 am | Permalink

            When
            It is over approx two years after Article 50 is invoked
            How
            That is a matter for negotiations with the EU
            And the Govt have stated that Parliament will be involved during that process.

          • Jerry
            Posted November 5, 2016 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; The When is not how long is A50 but when it should get triggered, do keep up! Also who should decide what to negotiate, one third of the popular vote or the entire popular vote – the HoC in other words and not just the cabinet and their advisor’s.

            Also as the ramification of Brexit is likely to span at least this and the next election cycle surely all parties should be involved in our future planning, if it was good enough for the Olympic Stadium and before that the Millennium Dome projects then the principle should apply to Brexit too.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

            When it is triggered is “early next year” as the Govt have stated.
            The process takes two years max then we have left.
            Have you asked the EU the same questions
            I mean they are involved too

          • Jerry
            Posted November 6, 2016 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

            @Edwardw2; “When it is triggered is “early next year” as the Govt have stated.”

            That is what the government wants but they have no referendum mandate to impose that date nor any mandate regarding the details of Brexit without asking parliament first, as no one was asked such specific questions on the referendum ballot paper – a the FACT you and others simply do not want to accept.

            Oh and as the EU is not involved until A50 is triggered, the current omni-shambles is nothing to do with them!

  15. Ian Wragg
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    We now see the downside of selling the family silver as foreign owned companies try and increase prices to maintain profit margins.
    Luckily with the supermarkets having a price war price rises are being moderated.
    I was pleased the boss of Wetherspoons has said he will boycott EU lagers if they keep on bullying us.
    We’ve just revamped our kitchen and made a point of buying UK manufactured goods.
    I believe many more are adopting our attitude.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

      ‘I was pleased the boss of Wetherspoons has said he will boycott EU lagers if they keep on bullying us’

      – Sounds as if he’s having a mid-life crisis.

    • Jerry
      Posted November 4, 2016 at 9:05 am | Permalink

      @Iain Wragg; “Luckily with the supermarkets having a price war price rises are being moderated.”

      For now, until they simply de-list such items or refuse to pay the market price (expecting their suppliers to take the financial hit), both of which have unwelcome consequences on jobs directly and indirectly affected…

      “I was pleased the boss of Wetherspoons has said he will boycott EU lagers if they keep on bullying us.”

      I wonder what his customers will think, probably vote with their feet!

  16. StevenL
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    A quick glance around the online car brokers suggests new imported cars are the same price or a little cheaper than pre-June 23rd.

  17. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    Off Topic:
    I have always argued that people are hanged and not hung. It was the usage in my early days when we used to surround the dark-brown wireless set in the 1950s and listened to the last macabre bong of Big Ben and on the last bong we got a shudder down our spines for it meant at that very instant a soul had been hanged by the government’s hangman. Treason could in theory result in a person being hanged too.
    We do not have capital punishment now. It is hard to make sense of what the modern usage could be in the case of those one could think should be hanged or hung for say High Treason.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

      ‘We do not have capital punishment now. It is hard to make sense of what the modern usage could be in the case of those one could think should be hanged or hung for say High Treason’

      – We don’t need capital punishment back to sort out our problems if that’s what you’re implying (we had loads of capital punishment during WW2 and the Holocaust). The problem with the world is that too many people hate each other. We need more (soft + tough) Love not Capital Punishment.

      • Mitchel
        Posted November 4, 2016 at 10:42 am | Permalink

        “We need more (soft + tough) Love not Capital Punishment”

        Trotsky,who always had a way with words,described such sentiments as “Kantian-priestly and vegetarian-Quaker prattle”

  18. MickN
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    So let me get this right. If there is a general election and the tories lose it is perfectly ok to over-ride the will of the people and ignore the vote. That Judge that ruled in the high court this morning will have blood on his hands. Democracy has many faults but it is the best system we have or should I say had.

    • Enrico
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

      We voted the government in to make the laws and decisions they promised in their manifestos so why are the legal profession even involved?
      If the judges rule against the government why go all the trouble of having a government?We may as well let the legal profession rule the country!!!! I think not???

    • Enrico
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

      We voted the government in to make the laws and decisions they promised in their manifestos so why are the legal profession even involved?
      If the judges rule against the government why go all the trouble of having a government?We may as well let the legal profession rule the country!!!! I think not??? What a state the country would be in

  19. fedupsoutherner
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

    Well, well, well. As suspected the courts have found against the will of the people. How many of us could have guessed that outcome? God knows what will happen now and whether any vote of any kind in this country will ever be taken seriously again. They wonder why people have no interest in politics. Well this is why. Our opinions count for nothing.

  20. fedupsoutherner
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Apparently the government are to appeal over the ruling against Article 50.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/03/high-court-to-rule-on-brexit-legal-battle-and-theresa-mays-decis/

    What are our chances John??

    • Longinus
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

      17.4 million to 640 or so.

  21. zorro
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    I would suggest that lowering interest the other month, and pumping more QE didn”t help sterling’s relative value, so the Bank shouldn’t be surprised. I am sure that they are acting in the country’s interet and not trying to cover their own backs……

    zorro

  22. Mark B
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    I have always believed that a price of an item sold is essentially made up of two parts. One part is the cost of materials and the other the cost of labour. As the pound rises and falls, so to does the cost of the imported raw materials. The labour aspect is unaffected by this.

    Labour cost is determined by wage demands. Currently, wage demands are low so the cost of exported manufactured goods is also low. Conversely, the imported goods are higher.

    What also affects prices, is supply and demand and competition.

    I mention all this because to look at inflation if the raw can be very misleading. Only the cost of food, fuel and labour are important in my opinion, as it is the rises in these that can have an effect on consumer spending which is vital in a Service Based Economy such as ours.

  23. turboterrier
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    Well as we all know if you are millionaire and have contacts with ex wealthy politicians you can overide the clearly defined wishes of the people. Democracy is dead and buried we only kid ourselves that it exists. The Law Courts have done nothing to replace the doubts and concerns the real people of this country have for politicians. The EU is falling apart nd nobody even mentions the brave new world if we had voted to remain and the draconian plans that the so called unelected leaders have plans already on the drawing board

  24. margaret
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Well Mark Carney has got a few more years to work things his way !

  25. margaret
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    The fact is that most traditional women who budget for the family will not buy those things which rise too steeply, so the knock on effect of that will harm the companies themselves. I myself do not have favourite brands and go for the most cost effective incorporating quality and value for money

    • a-tracy
      Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

      Agreed.
      This will be a boon for switched on online retailers.

  26. hans christian ivers
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    John

    This is only for supermarkets not for clothing and other prices and the purchasing power of teh man in the street is not being eroded and people are getting poorer, anticipated inflation over 3% next years and therefore all having to pay more with less earnings.

    But John you always seem to ignore the facts to make your points so what ever we say Brexit will always be good for you whatever happends

  27. Bob
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

    Mark Carney being interviewed by Helia Ebrahimi for C4 news gave “forward guidance” that interest rates May need to rise if inflation continues to rise. He only reduced the interest rate a couple of months ago!

    He made no mention of the effect of printing money – because everyone knows that printing money doesn’t cause inflation. He seems to think that it’s market perception of the effects of Brexit rather than QE and record low interest rates that crashed the pound.

    In the same interview we are told that since the referendum:
    – butter has increased 62%
    – sugar up 37%
    – milk up 52%

    Of course there was no attempt to explain why basic foodstuffs produced here in the UK are so hugely affected by the GBP/USD exchange rate.

    • a-tracy
      Posted November 4, 2016 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

      Mark Carney is shopping in the wrong shops, 2 litres of Scottish milk in Aldi today 84p, 3 litres of Scottish milk £1.14. Sugar 1kg Silverspoon 69p in Tesco, 50p T&L in Wilkos.

  28. a-tracy
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 9:25 pm | Permalink

    I’d go in next week and arrange a vote to give PM the right to launch A50, forget the appeal if there are legal grounds to stop here there are legal grounds full stop. But the people need to know whether we are represented or not? If we’re not, we’re better staying in then just vetoing everything.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page